/m/cubs

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

I would love to read more about the contract between the rooftop owners and the Cubs since if it is really true that the contract is ironclad and prevents renovations I have no real idea why the Cubs are trying to renovate. I've read elsewhere that the Cubs and the rooftop owners had a deal in which the Cubs didn't renovate until 2012 or so so Telander's tidbit is something completely different and I'm wondering what is true and what isn't.

McCoy: has there been any announced timeline on the renovations? It's possible they are going to wait out the contract for the outfield stuff. Of course, one of the articles I read yesterday (maybe this one) had a spokesman downplaying the obstructive effects of the changes - so maybe not.

McCoy: has there been any announced timeline on the renovations? It's possible they are going to wait out the contract for the outfield stuff. Of course, one of the articles I read yesterday (maybe this one) had a spokesman downplaying the obstructive effects of the changes - so maybe not.

They'd be waiting a long time then since they have like 10 years to go on the contract running out. So just a year after Soriano's contract runs out then.

He didn't say it would be in his or anyone else's lifetime. Mathematically, if Major League Baseball continues in something close to its current state for infinity years, the odds of the Cubs winning one of those infinity World Series is nearly 3%.

All I know is if they "renovate" Wrigley to make it into the same kind of sideshow ######## that most other ballparks are with loud racket and flashing lights, I'm not going back.

That is a really weird statement to make in regards to Wrigley. But no stadium makes you treat the actual game as a sideshow. If you want to sit down and watch the game you can. If you want to walk around, drinking beer, eating food, playing games, meeting people, and watch the game occasionally what is so wrong with that and how does that stop you from sitting in your seat and watching the game?

Wrigley has drawn more than the Rangers the last 3 years. I'm jus sayin.

Well, on one hand -- the Cubs do miss out on some revenue streams... they're near the bottom of parking receipts, the landmark status does limit their revenue streams for ad space in the park. Even with the addition of luxury boxes some decades back, I'm betting they're also in the lower 3rd amongst MLB teams in revenue from that little cash cow, too.

On the other, if you believe Forbes -- the Cubs are THE most profitable team in Major League Baseball.... not the most revenue and not the most valuable, but the team with the best bottom line.

That said... yes... I fear a new curse is upon us. And I really do wish we would start disposing of the many old curses - yes, most of which are stupid - before we started creating new ones.

That is a really weird statement to make in regards to Wrigley. But no stadium makes you treat the actual game as a sideshow. If you want to sit down and watch the game you can. If you want to walk around, drinking beer, eating food, playing games, meeting people, and watch the game occasionally what is so wrong with that and how does that stop you from sitting in your seat and watching the game?

There's vastly more piped-in noise in ballparks these days, which is very distracting. It's generally worse at minor league parks, but there's a lot of it in the majors too. Then there are those who find the ever increasing number of flashing lights and video screens another distraction. These things don't force you to ignore the game, but they certainly encourage it.

On the other, if you believe Forbes -- the Cubs are THE most profitable team in Major League Baseball.... not the most revenue and not the most valuable, but the team with the best bottom line.

In fairness to the Cubs, they were the most profitable team while carrying an $88 million payroll. Revenues would presumably go up with wins, but a lot of the profit comes from being a a high-income team with a midrange payroll.

But a chunk of it occurs between pitches, or at least between batters. There's almost never a lengthy stretch without some sort of artificial noise.

you're in a stadium with 20,000 to 50,000* other people. There is going to be noise and distractions no matter what. What it comes down to is whether or not a person is going to let minor things annoy them in a major sort of way. Being in the service industry it always makes me chuckle a little when I see what minor little insignificant things will send people into a froth.

you're in a stadium with 20,000 to 50,000* other people. There is going to be noise and distractions no matter what.

Except there isn't a lot of artifical noise blaring at the current patrons of Wrigley. The team wants to put up a big huge video board to end this and start bombarding people with ads and a bunch of unnecessary noise. That's at the core of this renovation -- putting up unsightly things to pipe in more noise and ads.

No one can possibly suggest that Wrigley Field is somehow a lesser venue because it lacks a big huge video board. This is just another totally unnecessary change being foisted upon people to generate totally superfluous and unnecessary revenue streams. The Cubs and Wrigley Field are a cash cow as it is.

It will be tought for Ricketts to displace Loria, but I'm glad to see he's giving it the old college try.

I have no idea what half the comments on this thread even mean, but this is the most baffling.

I would love to read more about the contract between the rooftop owners and the Cubs since if it is really true that the contract is ironclad and prevents renovations I have no real idea why the Cubs are trying to renovate. I've read elsewhere that the Cubs and the rooftop owners had a deal in which the Cubs didn't renovate until 2012 or so so Telander's tidbit is something completely different and I'm wondering what is true and what isn't.

Where'd you read that? Because I cannot fathom a contract that would be signed by the Cubs could possibly include that type of clause. It seems like a pretty straight-forward agreement that as long as the rooftops pay the Cubs, they get unobstructed views. I fail to see how it would be difficult for the Cubs to get out of that deal. The only holdup to the Cubs completely telling the rooftops to go #### themselves is because of Tunney/"neighborhood assoc." and the other stuff the Cubs want to do.

The Cubs and Wrigley Field are a cash cow as it is.

Wrigley is still falling apart. There's only so much constant maintenance that can be done until it becomes dangerous. Now, that doesn't mean all this other stuff has to be included to remodel it, but since they're actually paying for it themselves, that extra money does come in handy.

The fact that the Cubs are paying for this themselves really is the biggest story here and it's constantly overlooked.

Tunney told The Tribune that if the Wrigley bleacher expansion is completed in the next eight years, according to the agreement, the Cubs would have to compensate those rooftop owners whose views were obstructed.

It will be tought for Ricketts to displace Loria, but I'm glad to see he's giving it the old college try.

Yes, because financing renovations out of one's own pocket while expressing a commitment to winning is so similar to shaking down multiple municipalities for taxpayer funded stadia and committing multiple bait-and-switches in constructing the rosters that play in said stadia to enable said shakedowns.

Or, what Moses said. I have absolutely no idea what you're basing this comparison on.

Except there isn't a lot of artifical noise blaring at the current patrons of Wrigley. The team wants to put up a big huge video board to end this and start bombarding people with ads and a bunch of unnecessary noise. That's at the core of this renovation -- putting up unsightly things to pipe in more noise and ads.

I've sat in the Wrigley Field bleachers on many occasions. There's plenty of non-ballgame related noise to distract you there. I'll take the Chicken Dance over "Get a load of that babe! Do you think she agrees that Left Field Sucks?" any day.

Tunney told The Tribune that if the Wrigley bleacher expansion is completed in the next eight years, according to the agreement, the Cubs would have to compensate those rooftop owners whose views were obstructed.

Great source, and very timely. Not that I'm criticizing you, but I find it highly unlikely that even that can be stretched into the Cubs being restricted. And if that's all that's out there on it.... Also, that 8 years is up and is specific to the bleachers.

I'm sure the compensation is peanuts compared to the whole project, considering the rooftops are paying the Cubs relatively little for this "right" in the first place.

I've sat in the Wrigley Field bleachers on many occasions. There's plenty of non-ballgame related noise to distract you there. I'll take the Chicken Dance over "Get a load of that babe! Do you think she agrees that Left Field Sucks?" any day.

The fact that they still play "YMCA" during every damn pitching change is inexcusable. The fact that people *still* do the stupid dance is even more inexcusable. Also, memo to the organist: Playing "Down on the Corner" when runners are on first and third is no longer clever after about the fourth time.

And Dan Gilbert promised the Cavaliers would win an NBA title before Lebron James.

I'd bet your from Cleveland, so you know, but I'm amazed at how much traction that bought Gilbert, and that he still has it. He's a barely competent owner, but fans there absolutely eat up every bit of his bluster.

Or, what Moses said. I have absolutely no idea what you're basing this comparison on.

Can I just plead that I haven't kept up with this? THe last I read, he was trying to get financing to move Wrigley. If he just wants to put up a scoreboard, have at.

However, I'm with everyone else about the blare and gall of the modern ballpark. It IS during the game - it's between pitches and between batters. Bad enough if it's between innings but once the inning starts, there shouldn't be, IMO, sound and lights.

As a consumer of the service industry, I'm always amazed at what the servers expect us to pay to put up with.

Having said that, trying to make the ballpark experience appeal to me will probably make it not very appealing to a broad audience, so it's hard to blame them for going for mass appeal. I just won't be going.

Isn't that exactly what the claim was? "The Cubs and the rooftop owners had a deal in which the Cubs didn't renovate until 2012"

Well, that was support for the first sentence of the post: "if it is really true that the contract is ironclad and prevents renovations I have no real idea why the Cubs are trying to renovate," which is the part I haven't heard and have the hardest time believing.

I probably shouldn't compare someone to Loria without being much better versed as to the details.

That was what drew the heat in my response; it's one thing to not be on top of the details, but comparing someone to Jeff Loria's a pretty serious accusation in the absence of proof. Your mea culpa is acknowledged, so all's well...

In fairness to the Cubs, they were the most profitable team while carrying an $88 million payroll. Revenues would presumably go up with wins, but a lot of the profit comes from being a a high-income team with a midrange payroll.

Oh sure - current profitability most definitely is tied to the midrange payroll (and for the record, I've been wholly on board with having a midrange payroll at this point in the cycle).

However, without going back to look it up -- I do think the Cubs were still in the top 5 in overall revenue and I believe they were 3rd in team value.

He's a bumbling fool who has convinced himself (and most of Northeast Ohio) that he's a genius. It helps when you've got the best basketball player in the universe on your team for a few years.

No opinion on how he runs the team, but his company (Quicken Loans) is extremely impressive and well-run, and he's basically trying to rebuild downtown Detroit. Maybe that's a bumbling move, I don't know.

The fact that the Cubs are paying for this themselves really is the biggest story here and it's constantly overlooked.

This is so true. I can't imagine - and I'm not exaggerating, I seriously can't imagine - what fans would have rather had Ricketts do differently than what he's done. Threaten to move the team to Charlotte without 100% public financing? Let Wrigley collapse from age and neglect? Just let Tom Tunney design all the renovations?

I mean, really. Dude's handled this as well as can possibly be hoped for, and what happens? People either whine about a new video board or they pretend that hiring Theo Freakin' Epstein is all just a devious plot to trim payroll.

My guess is, it's the end effect of the loudness wars. Songs are recorded super-hot, so it sounds good on shitty iphone earpieces, then they clip the hell out of it at the venue, because bass, and, I guess, someone profits. I don't get how, or why, but I guess they must.

I'd bet your from Cleveland, so you know, but I'm amazed at how much traction that bought Gilbert, and that he still has it. He's a barely competent owner, but fans there absolutely eat up every bit of his bluster.

Gilbert is an incompetent moron who thinks he's the greatest. If he hadn't bumbled building a team around LeBron, they would likely have a few titles now, and they might still have LeBron. Has any all time great ever consistently had such bad support as James did in Cleveland? All the anger Cleveland fans directed towards LeBron should have been towards his incompetent ass. If the NBA didn't reward his suckitude with top draft picks, they would be the worst team in the NBA on a yearly basis.

The problem with Castillo is that after his batting average drops 150 or so points - which it probably will, given his history - his numbers are going to look a lot less impressive. It's not like he can coast on a .500 BAbip all year long.

In May of 2001, I traveled 9,000 miles from Japan to Chicago to see the Cubs play. It was only my second time at Wrigley. At first I enjoyed the wonderful scenery, the organ music, the vendors hawking beer, the old-timey atmosphere. The game began. The Cubs went down 1-2-3 in the first. Then they went down 1-2-3 in the second, while the Padres scored. Then they went down 1-2-3 in the third, while the Padres scored a run. And the thought occurred to me that I had come all this way to see the Cubs lose. And I tell you, the organ, the vendors, that old-timey atmosphere? It was getting on my damn nerves. The beer vendors were so obnoxious I would have punched one in the face if I'd been sitting close enough. The harsh notes of the organ were nails driven into my brain.

Then Sammy homered in the 4th, and Gary Matthews Jr. hit a 2 run shot in the 5th. Then Mueller went yard in the 6th. Now the Cubs were on top, and I was loving the scenery, the organ music, the vendors, and the old-timey atmosphere. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm a Cubs fan, not a Wrigley fan (though I like it very much). Regardless of whether the innovations could bring about a championship, if I went to a game I'd be a hell of a lot happier if the Cubs were winning with a Jumbotron than if they were losing with just the organ and the hand-operated scoreboard.